D&D is not a supers game.

[Imaro]

However, I do think it's wrong to say D&D isn't a super hero. It very well can be at higher levels (or earlier with the right rules). It's also not just a superhero game. In general, low level D&D is frakin' fantasy Vietnam. While some people enjoyed it, many also did NOT enjoy it...

The problem is that in earlier editions one could easily skip over the "fantasy Vietnam" levels by choosing to play at a higher level. 4e changed this by elimintaing that play from it's span of levels, and didn't really give an easy way to get back to that style of play for those who enjoyed it. That's why I think this is such a divisive subjects, because WotC has shown that they may make the choice to actively disregard what a subset (on either side of the argument) of it's players enjoyed without giving an easily implemented solution for the game to be played that way.

 

[Obryn]

The problem is that in earlier editions one could easily skip over the "fantasy Vietnam" levels by choosing to play at a higher level. 4e changed this by elimintaing that play from it's span of levels, and didn't really give an easy way to get back to that style of play for those who enjoyed it.

Could I really be the only one who found low-level 4e at least as deadly as low-level 3e?

-O

 

[Hussar]

Fantasy Viet Nam? Really? You never played 2e did you? I can make a 1st level 2e fighter, straight from the PHB, that kills ogres in 2 rounds by himself. (longsword specs - 14 points/hit, 3/2 attacks = 42 points of damage in 2 rounds without a strength bonus - kills anything less than 6 hit dice automatically).

By 2e, characters were so powerful relative to the monsters that the only way to kill them was AT very low levels when they didn't have enough hit points. After about 3rd, it took ridiculous numbers to kill PC's. There's a reason that a 5th level party is expected to gank an ancient black dragon in AD&D. (First Dragonlance module)

Sure, you might be a mere mortal for a level, maybe two, but, that's about it.

 

[herrozerro]

Could I really be the only one who found low-level 4e at least as deadly as low-level 3e?

-O

Im finding 4e to be quite deadly at all levels, my players just fought calastrix. Three headed dragon with a bite of 3d12+8 at 14th level!

 

[Argyle King]

Could I really be the only one who found low-level 4e at least as deadly as low-level 3e?

-O

I found levels 1-8 to be fairly well balanced between PCs and the creatures. Depending on group and part composition, I might extend that range a little bit.

I also found that (sometimes) the levels right around the tier breaks can be rough. For example, 10 and 21. Usually that's because you are fighting monsters which are a tier above you and have things available to them that you don't.

Otherwise -for me personally- I very rarely took my 4E antagonists and opponents seriously. I used to find metagame ways to challenge myself so I'd stay interested. With one character, I challenged myself to see how many encounters I could go without using a healing surge or a daily. Eventually, I gave up on that because one of the encounters was starting to drag really bad, so I used some dailies to speed things up.

With my last 4E character, I played a Bard, and my challenge was to see how many times I could multiclass. At epic levels I went into the Primal ED which allows you to start counting as different races. (Reincarnate champion?) I wanted to see how many races and classes I could count as before I hit level 30.

 

[Imaro]

Fantasy Viet Nam? Really? You never played 2e did you? I can make a 1st level 2e fighter, straight from the PHB, that kills ogres in 2 rounds by himself. (longsword specs - 14 points/hit, 3/2 attacks = 42 points of damage in 2 rounds without a strength bonus - kills anything less than 6 hit dice automatically).

By 2e, characters were so powerful relative to the monsters that the only way to kill them was AT very low levels when they didn't have enough hit points. After about 3rd, it took ridiculous numbers to kill PC's. There's a reason that a 5th level party is expected to gank an ancient black dragon in AD&D. (First Dragonlance module)

Sure, you might be a mere mortal for a level, maybe two, but, that's about it.

You do realize we are mostly talking about low levels (1-3 in particular) right?? You keep bringing up higher levels but I don't think anyone is arguing against the fact that in any edition of D&D your character is going to be a (super) hero at that point.

 

[Imaro]

Otherwise -for me personally- I very rarely took my 4E antagonists and opponents seriously. I used to find metagame ways to challenge myself so I'd stay interested. With one character, I challenged myself to see how many encounters I could go without using a healing surge or a daily. Eventually, I gave up on that because one of the encounters was starting to drag really bad, so I used some dailies to speed things up.

As a DM running a 4e game (at level 5 right now) I am experiencing this. Danger in 4e, as far as my players are concerned, is pretty much a joke.... especially if I stick to the guidelines given in the 4e DMG. I mean the fights take long but there's very little tension during the battles which is making the game less and less fun for all of us.

 

[Argyle King]

As a DM running a 4e game (at level 5 right now) I am experiencing this. Danger in 4e, as far as my players are concerned, is pretty much a joke.... especially if I stick to the guidelines given in the 4e DMG. I mean the fights take long but there's very little tension during the battles which is making the game less and less fun for all of us.

In defense of 4E, I will admit that things got a lot better later on in the system. The fixed monster math which came with MM3 helped. It didn't completely alleviate the problem, but it most certainly helped. Unfortunately, the higher damage values normally came with lower defenses, so a lot of the harder hitting monsters died faster too; before their increased damage could come into play.

Out of the 4E DMGs, I'd say that I feel the second one is far better than the first one. That being said, I honestly have no idea how the skill challenge DCs found in DMG2 were deemed reasonable. I ended up writing my own DC table.

 

[Obryn]

Yeah, the unfortunate truth is that the 4e designers didn't really figure out the system during the first 3 books. More extensive playtesting would have found this. The great thing is that there was a steady increase in quality, starting at PHB2, hitting a really good stride starting somewhere around MM3/Demonomicon/Dark Sun, and peaking around the Essentials releases. Monster Vault is IMO one of the best monster supplements ever produced, bar none.

Different strokes, I suppose, but my players were threatened pretty much constantly during low levels - and not just because we were running Dark Sun.

I personally couldn't get a good challenge for my own group using 3.5's CR/EL system by the guidelines, so YM Absolutely V.

-O

 

[Imaro]

Im finding 4e to be quite deadly at all levels, my players just fought calastrix. Three headed dragon with a bite of 3d12+8 at 14th level!

Different strokes, I suppose, but my players were threatened pretty much constantly during low levels - and not just because we were running Dark Sun.

Just out of curiosity... how many PC's did you two have that died, and/or TPK's between levels 1 to 3? One thing my group noticed in earlier levels was one, maybe two of them went unconscious during a fight, but they were always healed before they were in any real danger of dying. Thus it felt scary the first few times, then it just felt like an illusion.

Also on another note, what exactly do you two consider a challenging fight in 4e? Do you follow the guidelines or do you tend to disregard them?